tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post539441976935854892..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Cross-purposesRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-79264078878263068232009-08-28T20:16:16.866-04:002009-08-28T20:16:16.866-04:00"Vytautas - If something is older, then it ca..."Vytautas - If something is older, then it carries more historical weight such as New Testament manuscripts."<br /><br />Vytautas,<br /><br />If your premise was sound, then all it could prove is the antiquity of the corruption of Christian doctrine. For example, most historical scholars (whether New Testament or Patristics, Protestant or Catholic) will admit that the distinction between episkopos and presbyter in function originated with Ignatius of Antioch. Nevertheless, Ignatius was very early in church history.<br /><br />Secondly, I would challenge your premise. The Dead Sea Scrolls are older than the manuscripts of the Masoretic text. However, most scholars consider the Masoretic text more reliable at most points of difference.Saint and Sinnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14166699860672840738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-39935745399317344612009-08-27T07:36:55.760-04:002009-08-27T07:36:55.760-04:00There was a lot of disunity in early church histor...There was a lot of disunity in early church history, which is why Celsus could hyperbolically write in the second century:<br /><br />"Christians at first were few in number, and held the same opinions; but when they grew to be a great multitude, they were divided and separated, each wishing to have his own individual party: for this was their object from the beginning....being thus separated through their numbers, they confute one another, still having, so to speak, one name in common, if indeed they still retain it. And this is the only thing which they are yet ashamed to abandon, while other matters are determined in different ways by the various sects." (cited in Origen's Against Celsus, 3:10, 3:12)<br /><br />The earliest advocate of a papacy seems to have been the Roman bishop Stephen, acting in his own interests, around the middle of the third century. His claims were widely opposed in the East and West, by men like Firmilian and Cyprian. To include men like Firmilian and Cyprian in his definition of early church unity, Bryan Cross would have to define unity in a sub-Roman-Catholic manner.<br /><br />It's true that apostolic succession was a popular concept in early patristic Christianity. It's also true that the concept had deep cultural roots in other contexts, is absent from many early Christian sources, is defined in a variety of ways, sometimes is defined in a way acceptable to Protestantism, and sometimes has been advocated by Protestants. An appeal to apostolic succession would have to be highly qualified in order to lead one to Roman Catholicism. And the historical record doesn't support such a highly qualified definition.<br /><br />Keep in mind that men like Irenaeus and Cyprian qualified their comments on apostolic succession by other standards. A bishop must meet particular doctrinal and moral standards. Churches such as Rome and Ephesus are significant for particular historical reasons that may not be applicable at all times. Etc.Jason Engwerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031011335190895123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-2122422785250361022009-08-27T04:53:32.964-04:002009-08-27T04:53:32.964-04:00Steve quoting Bryan: Internal evidence is evidence...Steve quoting Bryan: <i>Internal evidence is evidence that is uniquely available to us once we have accepted the Church’s authority and teachings. Those outside cannot perceive this evidence as evidence. </i><br><br>Honest to gosh Steve, I never knew there was "internal evidence". Unless he is echoing Karl Adam: "The Catholic of a living faith, and he alone, can make this [historical] investigation [of Catholicism]."John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-13606577578675906862009-08-27T00:11:22.907-04:002009-08-27T00:11:22.907-04:00"Cross-purposes"
You a veddy punny guy,..."Cross-purposes"<br /><br />You a veddy punny guy, Steve.Truth Unites... and Divideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891402278361538353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-13160686773319174142009-08-26T23:57:33.620-04:002009-08-26T23:57:33.620-04:00VYTAUTAS SAID:
"Vytautas - But that could be...VYTAUTAS SAID:<br /><br />"Vytautas - But that could be said of any event of history."<br /><br />Which is precisely the problem with the Catholic appeal to historical continuity. Since the present is the outgrowth of the past, every current development is traceable to the past, going all the way back to day 1.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-12052902634330048942009-08-26T23:39:36.889-04:002009-08-26T23:39:36.889-04:00Steve - The Protestant movement didn't come ou...Steve - The Protestant movement didn't come out of nowhere. There's a chain of events leading up to the Reformation. The Protestant movement is an offshoot of the Latin church. <br /><br />And the same holds true for the Tridentine church. <br /><br />Vytautas - But that could be said of any event of history. There is a chain of events leading up to the Latin church and so on. That does not make every event however old the earth is.<br /><br />Steve - No, antiquity of itself is no indicator of truth. If something like the NT is already true, then older MSS are more reliable inasmuch as they are more likely to accurately transmit that truth.<br /><br />Vytautas - Are the older MSS an indicator of the truth, since they more accurately transmit that truth?<br /><br />But you could have inerrant MSS of the Koran. Yet they would be inerrant copies of an errant book.<br /><br />Vytautas - The inerrant MSS of the Koran would indicate the truth of an errant book.Vytautashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563655929016752682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-90838492280091362512009-08-26T23:26:11.288-04:002009-08-26T23:26:11.288-04:00"Vytautas - On my count it has been about 500..."Vytautas - On my count it has been about 500 years for the Protestant movement."<br /><br />The Protestant movement didn't come out of nowhere. There's a chain of events leading up to the Reformation. The Protestant movement is an offshoot of the Latin church. <br /><br />And the same holds true for the Tridentine church. <br /><br />"If something is older, then it carries more historical weight such as New Testament manuscripts."<br /><br />No, antiquity of itself is no indicator of truth. If something like the NT is already true, then older MSS are more reliable inasmuch as they are more likely to accurately transmit that truth.<br /><br />But you could have inerrant MSS of the Koran. Yet they would be inerrant copies of an errant book.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-72711863165931141852009-08-26T23:17:54.836-04:002009-08-26T23:17:54.836-04:00Steve - For that matter, the Protestant movement c...Steve - For that matter, the Protestant movement can also be traced back through the past 2000 years of church history.<br /><br />Vytautas - On my count it has been about 500 years for the Protestant movement.<br /><br />Steve - Evidence for a historical process doesn’t count as evidence for truth.<br /><br />Vytautas - If something is older, then it carries more historical weight such as New Testament manuscripts.Vytautashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563655929016752682noreply@blogger.com